Planning commission recommends Gibson Solar special exception to supervisors after lengthy public hearing

The King George County Planning Commission voted 5–3 on a motion to recommend approval of Open Road Renewables’ Gibson Solar special exception (PC‑09‑25 / Z‑2024‑00184) after a lengthy public hearing marked by divided local opinion and detailed technical questioning.

Open Road Renewables presented the revised project as a 134‑megawatt solar facility sited inside approximately 890 acres of fenced arrays and paired with a livestock grazing operation. The company said it will place nearly 1,300 acres under a conservation easement enforced by the North American Land Trust, allow solar and agriculture within the fence line during operation, and prohibit uses such as electricity generation for resale, junkyards, recycling plants and heavy manufacturing. Project representatives told the commission that grading would be minimal—“only a couple percentage points” of the site—and that nearly all disturbed areas would be stabilized through a series of soil‑health measures and stormwater best management practices.

Opponents raised multiple concerns in public comment and during commissioner questioning. Residents and landowners cited potential erosion and runoff from construction, loss of forest cover (applicants said about 600 acres of pine plantation would be harvested regardless in the coming decade), the long‑term fate of the land after decommissioning, possible hazardous chemical runoff from panels, the origin of panels and impacts on property values. Several speakers asked whether electric generation from the project would benefit King George residents; project staff said the generated power enters the grid and that the county would receive proffered tax revenue estimated at roughly $500,000 per year.

Commissioners focused on several technical items. They asked whether conservation easement language permits any low‑density residential uses after decommissioning; Open Road said the land‑trust’s standard form currently allows up to one home per parcel on very large tracts but pledged to work with the land trust on redlines to remove or tighten that language if the commission preferred. Commissioners pressed on electromagnetic‑field (EMF) and noise impacts; applicants said EMF concerns are limited to inverters and that they had voluntarily set inverters back roughly 500 feet from the fence line, and they cited public health literature and an EPA test requirement for panels. Stormwater design revisions were highlighted: applicants said outlets and spillways were redesigned for larger storm events (e.g., 50‑year design for some outlets) and that the plan now includes roughly 90 stormwater basins and phased construction to limit exposed soil.

Commissioner Nicely moved that the commission forward PC‑09‑25 with a favorable recommendation and two stipulations: (1) the county attorney should ensure the conservation easement language is amended or clarified so that low‑density residential uses are not inadvertently authorized at decommissioning; and (2) hazardous‑chemical testing be added to the soil and stormwater monitoring program. The motion was seconded and passed on a roll‑call vote (Ayes 5, Noes 3). The commission also separately found the application to be in substantial accord with the county comprehensive plan.

What’s next: the planning commission’s favorable recommendation will be transmitted to the King George Board of Supervisors, which will take the final vote. The applicant signaled a willingness to continue working with staff and the land‑trust counterparty on the easement language and to incorporate additional monitoring measures requested by the commission.